From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Higgins v. Medina

United States District Court, E.D. California
Mar 18, 2009
CASE NO. 1:07-cv-00934-LJO-GSA PC (E.D. Cal. Mar. 18, 2009)

Summary

finding not cognizable plaintiff's due process claim arising from the falsification of reports and other documents relating to incident of excessive force because prisoners do not have an independent right, grounded in the Due Process Clause, to an accurate prison record

Summary of this case from Jones v. Lewis

Opinion

CASE NO. 1:07-cv-00934-LJO-GSA PC.

March 18, 2009


ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME, NUNC PRO TUNC TO MARCH 16, 2009 (Doc. 17)


Plaintiff Carl L. Higgins ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On January 29, 2009, the Court issued an order requiring Plaintiff to either file an amended complaint or notify the Court of his willingness to proceed only on his cognizable excessive force claims. On March 16, 2009, Plaintiff filed a second amended complaint, and a motion seeking leave to file the second amended complaint beyond time.

Plaintiff's motion for leave to file the second amended complaint is HEREBY GRANTED, nunc pro tunc to March 16, 2009.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Higgins v. Medina

United States District Court, E.D. California
Mar 18, 2009
CASE NO. 1:07-cv-00934-LJO-GSA PC (E.D. Cal. Mar. 18, 2009)

finding not cognizable plaintiff's due process claim arising from the falsification of reports and other documents relating to incident of excessive force because prisoners do not have an independent right, grounded in the Due Process Clause, to an accurate prison record

Summary of this case from Jones v. Lewis

finding not cognizable plaintiff's due process claim arising from the falsification of reports and other documents relating to incident of excessive force because prisoners do not have an independent right, grounded in the Due Process Clause, to an accurate prison record

Summary of this case from King v. Holland

finding not cognizable plaintiff's due process claim arising from the falsification of reports and other documents relating to incident of excessive force because prisoners do not have an independent right, grounded in the Due Process Clause, to an accurate prison record

Summary of this case from Canovas v. California Department of Corrections

finding not cognizable plaintiff's due process claim arising from the falsification of reports and other documents relating to incident of excessive force because prisoners do not have an independent right, grounded in the Due Process Clause, to an accurate prison record

Summary of this case from Hampton v. Haynie

finding not cognizable plaintiff's due process claim arising from the falsification of reports and other documents relating to incident of excessive force because prisoners do not have an independent right, grounded in the Due Process Clause, to an accurate prison record

Summary of this case from Jackson v. Baca
Case details for

Higgins v. Medina

Case Details

Full title:CARL L. HIGGINS, Plaintiff, v. J. MEDINA, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Mar 18, 2009

Citations

CASE NO. 1:07-cv-00934-LJO-GSA PC (E.D. Cal. Mar. 18, 2009)

Citing Cases

King v. Holland

In sum, Plaintiff's allegations of false reports and cover up, standing alone, do not state a cognizable…

Jones v. Lewis

It appears this claim is also premised, in part, on falsified documents, which, standing alone, does not…